Posted by lq0n6h90ya on July 26, 19113 at 05:52:09:
In Reply to: トッズ posted by vaclvicj on June 02, 19113 at 20:52:37:
s that haven't been suggested in order to make it seem as though Yahoo isn't involved with the NSA's Prism.This time it's real: Google-Waze deal on the way >> AllThingsDLiz Gannes and Mike Isaac: Waze will remain an independent entity for the time being, one source said, perhaps assuaging some fears that the tech giant will either outright kill or significantly alter the popular app.The deal would put an end to long-running speculation, fueled by leaks and tacit admissions, that?the Israeli-founded mobile startup would end up in the hands of a major tech player.However, it's likely not going to be as easy as writing a check. There are not many global sources of mapping data: just Waze, Google, Navteq and TomTom. Thus, this would be a deal that attracts serious regulatory scrutiny �� the political rigamarole that the search giant is all too familiar with at this point.Even if it keeps Waze independent for a while, at some point it will have to integrate it - and bite the bullet over competition. Otherwise, it's just a favoured source of data - which it could get for a lot less than the reported $1.3bn.Obama Is Checking Your Email >> TumblrHe's a busy guy.Microsoft retrieves lost Windows Phone device with prototype software >> The
[i]http://www.classicguesssale.com/guess-boots-c-10.html/Guess Boots[/i]
ng the front pages of newspapers found women wrote just 22% of front page articles. Employment patterns within journalism may go some way towards explaining the relative lack of women's voices in the news. Over the 15-year time period of the GMMP, the visibility of women as producers and subjects of news media has improved steadily, but relative visibility of women to men remains at a ratio of 1:3. And men's voices are generally privileged as being more authoritative when it comes to being used as "expert" sources. Women's voices, views and expertise are restricted. The Women in Journalism report found that women account for just 16% of those mentioned or quoted in lead stories on the front pages of newspapers and three quarters of "expert" voices were male.Introducing a discussion about Leveson's response to the representation of women, Woman's Hour presenter Jenni Murray pointed out: "You have to dig hard to find it." Newspaper hypocrisy over paedophiliaWhile Leveson's report states, "There is credible evidence that [sexist coverage] has a broader impact on the perception and role of women in society, and the sexualisation of society generally", he shirks the issue by saying that the inquiry is not the place to analyse or draw conclusions - issu
[i]http://www.womenclassicshoes.com/new-arrival-toms-shoes-c-1.html/New Arrival Toms Shoes[/i]
their number told an Israeli paper: "I'm a racist. I hate Arabs �� If they bring in Muslims, the fans will burn down the club. That can't happen. Arabs and Beitar Jerusalem don't mix."At Beitar's grounds, hours after the office was torched, club supporter Yaniv Pesso, 43, denounced La Familia. "They are stupid. They are a very small number, like a little mafia, but they have a big voice." Sport, politics and religion should not be mixed up, he said. "I don't like Muslims, but sport is sport."Beitar, however, is not just about sport. In Israel, football clubs have always been associated with political parties or movements, and Beitar's alignment is with the nationalist right. Its name is shared with a Zionist youth movement linked in the 1940s to Herut, a rightwing party founded by Menachem Begin, which later merged into today's ruling Likud party, led by Netanyahu.Its fans are predominantly Mizrahi Jews, who came to Israel from other countries in the Middle East and north Africa, and who have always felt excluded from and shunned by the Ashkenazi �C or eastern European �C elite. Mizrahi Jews make up about 40% of Israel's 8 million population.In contrast to Beitar, for example, Hapoel Tel Aviv, a club based in Israel's most liberal city, is still a
[u]http://www.classicguesssale.com/guess-bikini-c-6.html/Guess bikini[/u]
nnot be repaired and carriers become highly susceptible to cancers of the breast and ovaries.The discovery of BRCA1 in 1994, and a second version, BRCA2, discovered a year later, remains one of the greatest triumphs of modern genetics. It allows doctors to pinpoint women at high risk of breast or ovarian cancer in later life. Stars such as Sharon Osbourne and Christina Applegate have been among those who have had BRCA1 diagnoses and subsequent mastectomies. BRCA technology has saved many lives over the years. However, it has also triggered a major division in the medical community, a split that last week ended up before the nine justices of the US supreme court. At issue is the simple but fundamental question: should the law allow companies to patent human genes? It is a battle that has profound implications for genetic research and has embroiled scientists on both sides of the Atlantic in a major argument about the nature of scientific inquiry.On one side, US biotechnology giant Myriad Genetics is demanding that the US supreme court back the patents it has taken out on the BRCA genes. The company believes it should be the only producer of tests to detect mutations in these genes, a business it has carried out in the United States for more than a
[i][url=http://www.womenclassicshoes.com/toms-stripe-shoes-c-3.html/Toms Stripe Shoes]Toms Stripe Shoes[/url][/i]